President of Council Kathy McNear called Council to order on April 16, 2003, at 7:00 p.m.

The governmental body and those in attendance recited the pledge of allegiance. Mr. Knox gave the invocation.

Mr. Knox took roll call. Present were Council members Danbury, Galster, Pollitt, Squires, Vanover, Wilson and McNear.

The minutes of April 2, 2003 were approved with six affirmative votes with a couple of corrections. On page 7738 under Communications, there is a large blank space. The sentence should say "per 1000 cs rise to be", eliminate the blank space. Under New Business there is a letter t. It should be the word it. Mr. Danbury abstained.


Civil Service Commission Ė Mr. Strange reported that the Civil Service Commission business was to process correspondence from the City requesting the next ten eligible candidates for the position of patrol officer.

Rules and Laws - no report

Public Relations - no report

Public Health, Safety & Welfare - no report

Public Works Ė Mr. Wilson stated the East Crescentville Road repair and resurfacing work from SR 747 to Chesterdale is being performed as part of the overall Butler County Engineerís resurfacing project. Weíd be responsible for payment of that portion of the work within Springdale. The Butler Countyís Engineering Office anticipates that this work will begin in mid July at the same time as the I-75 bridge closing.

Public Utilities - no report

Capital Improvements Ė Mr. Danbury said the streetscape is almost done. Iíve heard a lot of compliments on it. Most of the work should be done by the end of this month. Cincinnati Bell is behind schedule on the telephone relocation for Kemper Road Phase II Old Commons Drive. The City is working Cincinnati Bell and Barrett Paving to get a revised project schedule. Weíre hoping to complete this by July 25th. Work is being done on the Sharon Road intersection. Weíre anticipating a re-bid of the CSX grade separation project by October of this year.

Finance Committee - no report

Planning Commission Ė Mr. Galster stated CVS was in with a final PUD development plan. There was a lot of discussion in regards to the entrance drive. The PUD, with a few conditions, was approved by a 7-0 vote. They anticipate a 2003 opening. They need a few variances from BZA. There was a subsequent special Planning Commission meeting on April 15. One of the conditions we had placed on them was that they close a right-in only to the site. After further review it was determined that that right-in allowed a better flow of traffic through their parking area, around the intersection in general so the PUD was modified to allow that right-in only. There was a zone map amendment for 1311 East Kemper Road from Office Building to General Building that was tabled from a previous meeting. There was no representation and that was removed from the agenda with a 7-0 vote. Dunkin Donuts had a request for a drive-thru. There are still some issues to be worked out and the applicant asked that we continue this. There was an application for a conditional use permit to allow an outdoor seating area at Graeterís. They have already built a patio on the back. There is no seating. There is a question as to the parking layout on their site so weíve asked them to come back in with a detailed parking plan and that was tabled until the next meeting. The next request was a seasonal deck enclosure to be located 20 feet 4 inches from the property line at 12178 Peak Drive. We have allowed similar ones in the past and that was approved 6-0-1. There was a request for a conditional use permit to allow an access drive to allow commercial development at 11601 Springfield Pike, CVS, to pass over a residentially zoned property at 11649 Springfield Pike. This is a driveway north of the development that would come between what is Bingís and the Laundromat and Smyth Automotive property. The need for that driveway arose to keep all the entrances away from the intersection for a safer arrangement. It splits the middle of the properties right now. The conditional use permit was granted 7-0. A right-of-way plat for Oak Hills Cemetery was approved 7-0.

Board of Zoning Appeals Ė Mr. Squires reported that the owner of 591 Lafayette Avenue requested to place an air conditioning unit approximately four feet from the side lot line. The variance was allowed 7-0. The applicant at 291 West Kemper is requesting a variance to construct a 34í x 38í square foot detached garage. The second part of the variance was that it be 18 feet high. These are very large lots and there are oversized garages on some of the lots in this part of the City. The owner accepted a 34í x 30í square foot garage and we allowed the 18 foot height. The variance was passed 7-0. The next request was for an additional garage at 545 Observatory Drive twenty feet from the front line. This was passed 6-0. The last request was CVS. There were three variances. One was an access for two-way traffic to exceed the permitted 24 feet. Another part is to allow the driveway to be within the 10 foot setback requirement. This would be a 6í5" setback. The third request was an off-premise sign. A portion of that sign would be for the Ruthie B property. All three variances were approved with a 7-0 vote.

Mr. Galster said the additional sign they will have at the north entrance is replacing a sign that was on the corner of Kemper Road and SR 4.

Ms. Pollitt said on the three car garage the gentleman wanted, it was also stipulated that there would never be a variance granted for an out building at that property.

Board of Health Ė Ms. Pollitt reported that there was a vote to accept the HIPPA Compliance Policies and Procedures. The purpose of HIPPA is to protect a personís medical privacy. There was also discussion on the SARS threat and smallpox vaccine. Ms. Pollitt said the department is providing ServSafe training at the end of the month. There was discussion on the Health Commissionerís resignation and the board had a discussion about performing a search for a new health commissioner. The Childrenís Health Fair was held yesterday.

Veteranís Memorial Committee Ė Mr. Wilson said the committee met with Mr. Robert Lanier earlier this month and did some brainstorming relative to funding that we could do for this project. Mr. Lanier is a veteran and has worked on several fund raising projects that have honored or benefited our veterans.

Ms. Pollitt asked is there any way we would know of any residents who are soldiers in Iraq so that we could honor them at a future date?

Mayor Webster replied I know one personally. We could make an appeal through Council.

Mr. Osborn said Bob Lanier is not only a veteran experienced in fund raising, heís also a resident of Springdale at Maple Knoll. He is volunteering his services to this effort. We found a great resource when Doyle suggested we talk to Bob. Bob was our first volunteer director of the Springdale Chamber of Commerce.

O-K-I Ė Mr. Knox said most of what happened at OKI does not have an immediate effect on Springdale residents. However, there was one resolution passed that I want to comment on. It has to do with the North/South Transportation Initiative. Part of the resolution talks about adding a fifth lane to I-75. Thatís actually misleading. They are going to ask the public for their input. They are looking at the Lockland entrance and exit, the I-475 interchange and the Brent Spence Bridge.

Mr. Danbury asked is the light rail a dead issue?

Mr. Knox replied at the moment I would say it is.

Mr. Danbury said Mr. Osborn reported several months ago that just for safety it was millions of dollars. I know a lot of people donít want taxation but itís going to have to be dealt with some way.

Ms. Pollitt said I have e-mailed, written, telephoned. If I could afford a billboard I would get one. I would like to see metered ramping at least attempted at Ronald Reagan and I-75 southbound and northbound at Mitchell Avenue.

Mr. Osborn said I co-chaired that task force. It involves jurisdictions from Cincinnati to Lima. The complexity is belittled by the comments we have had here tonight. It is far more complex than that. We have looked at many options including light rail and highway improvements. That millions of dollars that Mr. Danbury referred to was just to get continuity from Butler County downtown. We have different levels of service that varies according to what point you are in the corridor. Right now there are improvements in Butler County that will expedite traffic getting downtown, but it will only aggravate the situation once you are downtown. We have to go through these steps to show the federal government that we have looked at them. Even with that fifth lane, given the potential build out date of that, we will only be treading water. Without other alternative forms of transportation we will not catch up on the I-75 corridor.

Mr. Knox said I have been receiving messages about bus rapid transit, where you would have stations and the busses would not stop between those stations. Thatís a possible alternative.

Mayorís Report Ė Mayor Webster said Iíd like to share a news release that was given out by the Hamilton County Auditor, Dusty Rhodes dated April 11. It said the property imaging and appraisal data verification process will begin April 16 as part of the Countyís 2005 reappraisal. The field crews will be in white vans and will photograph the property from inside their vans. The vans will be clearly marked with signs that say Hamilton County Auditor Dusty Rhodes Property Appraisal Data Verification and Imaging Project. Crew members will wear ID badges and the project is expected to last through October of this year. This will be the first county-wide update of property photos since 1993.

Mayor Webster said I would like to compliment our Superintendent of Public Works, David Butsch and his excellent staff for putting the new flags out on the poles. I am really proud of them. Every other pole says Land of the Free and the alternate flags say Home of the Brave.

Mayor Webster read a proclamation declaring April 25, 2003 Arbor Day. Mayor Webster invited the elected officials and residents to come to the Arbor Day ceremony at the Community Center.

Clerk of Council/Finance Director Ė Mr. Knox said as a member of the Northern Cincinnati Convention and Visitorís Bureau, we did hold an election. The president of the executive committee will be Ron Haller of the Blue Ash Embassy Suites. Lisa Haller and Scott Allen from Downtown Properties divvied out the jobs and I am going to be the treasurer. I assure you that any money that will be spent will benefit the suburban properties.

Administratorís Report Ė Mr. Osborn stated last year a Supreme Court case, The Watch Tower Bible versus the Village of Stratton, Ohio, was decided. It struck down ordinances regulating door-to-door solicitation almost exactly like the one we have in Springdale. We have gone through the process of developing a new draft and would request that Council allow time for discussion under Old Business.

Mr. Osborn requested an executive session to discuss potential litigation.

Law Directorís Report - no report

Engineerís Report - no report


Mr. Knox read a communication from Time Warner Cable stating, "On March 31, 2003, we completed the restructuring of the TWE Partnership, and approximately 94% of the equity in all general partnership interests in TWE are now or soon will be held by Time Warner Cable through its wholly owned subsidiary, Time Warner New York Cable Inc. Once again, let me assure you these developments have absolutely no impact on our cable system, its operation or local management. TWE will continue to be bound by the terms and conditions of the franchise agreement subject to applicable state and federal laws."


Alice Todd, owner of 309 and 311 West Kemper Road, said the purpose of my being here this evening is to respectfully and earnestly request a rezoning of my properties. I have had the properties on the market for almost a year and Iíve had one offer. Thatís been given to me by a builder, EmKenn Homes, who is represented here today by Holly Todd. EmKenn Homes would like to put multi-family units there and had initially drawn up plans and presented those to the Planning Commission last month. Iíve read the minutes and spoken to some people in the City, who made me feel that if I had the approval of neighbors and especially the approval of the neighbors to the west of me, One of the objections from what Iím reading in the Planning Commission minutes is that it would be spot zoning, even though all the back of my property is Olde Gate. From my house to the Church my neighbors have indicated that they would be willing to sell and would like to have their property zoned multi-family as well. If I were staying here and a neighbor came to me with this proposition, I think this would be a great improvement to Springdale. I know that protocol would say take this to Zoning but I really need to sell the properties. Holly Todd has emphasized to me that she would work with the City and with neighbors to make it amenable to everyone involved.

Mr. Galster said this was in at Planning Commission as concept discussion to build three separate buildings. It is true that they have multi-family to the rear of the residence but they have single family on the other three sides. Anybody who has been involved in the idea of what happens to Kemper Road right now, weíve made all kinds of effort to maintain that single family along Kemper Road. I speak for myself but Iíll try to present the position of the board. The feeling in general was that it was spot zoning. It is economically viable as a single family residence at this point so there was no need to change the zoning. There was a suggestion from Planning Commission that if the rear of the property could be accessed via Olde Gate and more of an extension on Olde Gate and we left single family residence across the front of Kemper Road, that might be an avenue they would want to pursue. Without trying to design it, we couldnít make a commitment on whether that would go forth or not. It was a 7-0 voice vote to not recommend the rezoning of that property even though no vote was taken because it was a conceptual plan. We have spent a lot of time on our zoning map, Comprehensive Plan, have looked at every piece of parcel in Springdale to see what the best use would be over the course of the next 20, 30, 40, 50 years. It was that plan that those properties on Kemper Road would remain single family.

Ms. Todd said my neighbor, Mr. Dick, has told me since they tore down some of the properties on SR 4 for the enhancement, it has made his place less desirable as a single family residence because of the noise factor. Heís been disappointed by that. As far as the rezoning, when I came to that meeting on the Comprehensive Plan, I didnít understand that I could push for any changes at that time. I did make some phone calls to that company. It wasnít clear to me that I could have pushed for some changes. I have contacted Ms. McBride and left her a voice mail but I didnít get a response back.

Mr. Galster asked do you have a copy of the Planning Commission minutes? Ms. McBride was at that meeting and I think her comments are in line with the Planning Commission members.

Ms. Todd said I thought I read where she said the proposed proposition would be viable if they made the zoning change, especially if the properties to the west of me were included in that. Holly Todd has said itís possible that they would include that property in the project and also, she would continue the theme from SR 4 into the area. I think it would be a beautiful improvement as you come down from SR 4. The two properties that are considered key are willing to go along.

Mr. Galster said I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Ms. McBrideís comments would have been for the zoning to remain as it is. The idea that somehow the retail development would continue down Kemper Road is exactly what is not desired by the City.

Ms. Todd said I understand that Springdale Elementary is going to be rebuilt and I also understand that they want to buy all the properties next to them eastward to the church. The school and a church would be across the street. The developer would like to continue the old timey look like Montgomery has.

Mayor Webster said Ms. Todd, please take this the way it is intended, because we encourage people to come to Council meetings, but this is not the proper venue for this. If everybody up here was in favor of this and wanted it just as much as you do, we couldnít do that. You need to make a formal submission to request the rezoning to Planning Commission. If they deny it, then your course of appeal is the Court of Common Pleas.

Ms. Todd said I donít want to sue anyone. I appreciate your explanation.

Mr. Danbury said the biggest thing you have to look at it is the Comprehensive Plan. We have a SR 4 Corridor Study as a guideline for us to do the City in the way we want. We tried real hard over the years to reassure the people on Kemper that we are not going to widen it. Weíre not going to put anymore businesses out there. We just want to maintain the character of the residential area. I am looking at the minutes and it appears that there are a lot of variances that Ms. McBride has identified.

Ms. Todd said there is an alley between my property and Mr. Bentonís and Mr. Dickís properties that would be included in this and take away at least three of the variances that were mentioned.

Mr. Wilson said we have to make sure that we donít start setting precedents. We want to maintain the character of our streets. When something is zoned residential, single family, we like to keep it that way.

Mr. Vanover said there is a difference between single family residence and multi- family. This board has no jurisdiction over this. It does sound like there have been some changes in the conceptual plan that was presented initially. I believe you need to revisit Planning Commission and make a formal presentation.

Mr. Osborn said I just want to address the issue regarding East Alley. I think we had a conversation about that a month or two ago. East Alley was laid out in 1803. Itís a paper alley but we do have utilities in it south of where she is referring to. We do have the potential for putting utilities in it currently. To my knowledge it has never been abandoned and as a result we would have to vacate that alley for the proposal you are making. East Alley is still under the ownership of the City so thatís something else you need to look at.

Ms. Todd said for years my husband and I off and on went to the City and asked who owns this and they couldnít find it until Mr. Dick had a problem with his basement. Thatís when they found out there was a manhole that belonged to the City. I get a little bit of mixed feelings about the City claiming that.

Mr. Osborn replied the City Engineer is sitting right there, and he and I have known for years where East Alley is. Weíd be glad to give you that detail if youíd like to see it. Itís just a matter of whether we need it in the future. If we donít, thatís something that could be discussed with you.


Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Squires seconded.

Ordinance 16-2003 passed with seven affirmative votes.


Mr. Squires made a motion to adopt and Mr. Wilson seconded.

Ordinance 17-2003 passed with seven affirmative votes.


Mr. Galster made a motion to read by title only and Mr. Vanover seconded. The motion passed with seven affirmative votes.

First reading.

Mr. Osborn asked if a public hearing had been advertised. Mr. Knox stated he would have it advertised.

(Note: It was later determined that a public hearing was not required.)


Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Danbury seconded.

Mr. Osborn stated that we have had Phase II of the streetscape plan on our books for some time. The current estimate for Phase II as originally configured would be a little over $1.2 million. Recognizing that there are limited resources available for funding these projects in the OKI region, probably less than $5 million, we didnít want to take up a fifth of the funding in one application. In fact, we were certain we would not be successful in doing that. We are looking at going after this project with the minimum local match we can apply for, 20% local and 80% federal. The answer was to try to reduce the numbers for Phase II. We brought the cost down to $827,327, which results in a funding request to OKI for TE funds of $661,861. We think this is in the ball park of being a realistic application. In order to get to this point however, we had to eliminate some things that were previously in Phase II. We had to eliminate that part of the project that was south of Northland Boulevard that ran down to Cameron and we had to concentrate on the area north of Kemper up to Glensprings Drive. In that area, we had to eliminate some items as well. We had to eliminate the conversion to the decorative signal at Glensprings and SR 4, and also the pavers that would fill in between the sidewalk and curb from Pear Street to Glensprings Drive with a few exceptions. The principal items that would remain in the project would include the replacement of the existing street lights from Kemper to Glensprings. We would replace the signal system at the Cloverdale/Lawnview intersection with a new signal system and also put pavers from Kemper Road north to Pear Street on the west side as well. We would have some pavers at the intersection of Cloverdale/Lawnview at the cross walk areas. We are proposing this but the first step is to get the funding. If we donít get the funding we wonít be doing any of this. The funding application is due this week. We understand from what we have learned from OKI, the decision on the applications will be made in June 2003. If we receive 80% funding we will look at doing minimal work in 2003, mostly related to environmental issues. The design work for the project would not occur until 2004 and we would look at doing the construction in 2005. While I recognize that we have some budget issues that we are struggling with right now, if we can get a 400% return on our money by spending the original 20%, then I think it will be well worth it.

Mr. Danbury said you said they are eliminating the pavers completely. Can we change that down the road if we get the money?

Mr. Osborn responded everything I talked about being eliminated here can be considered at a later phase.

Mr. Danbury said when you come off the I-275 exist eastbound it would be nice to spruce that up a little bit.

Mr. Osborn stated that is part of Phase III.

Mr. Danbury said I have heard so many positive comments about what it looks like downtown. I think once the businesses start going in there like we anticipate, it will be really nice.

Mr. Osborn said Phase II was extending the project to the north and to the south, and a little treatment on the cross streets. Phase III would be other enhancements like at I-275, the triangle, the consideration of some public art.

Mayor Webster asked is it possible that we could produce a video of what weíve done in Phase I and submit that video with this application for the OKI members who have not had an opportunity to come out and see what weíve done. I think each application gets a field review by the committee.

Mr. Wilson said these items that we have now deleted, would they be considered construction increases and would we be responsible for 100% of the cost?

Mr. Osborn replied they would be if we went ahead and did them after we applied for the funding, but thereís nothing that says we canít ask for these additional items under another application in the future.

Resolution R8-2003 passed with seven affirmative votes.


Mr. Danbury said I would like to publicly compliment Mayor Webster for putting up the Residentsí Hall of Fame at the Community Center. I think it was a very nice touch.

Mr. Osborn said we need to change our solicitation ordinance. We had to come up with an alternative that would regulate commercial solicitation but would not regulate solicitation for other purposes such as not-for-profit organizations selling door-to-door to support themselves, political interests going door-to-door to try to lobby people on their particular point of view, surveys, any type of approach that is not commercial would still be permitted. The only control anyone has over that is that the local resident would have to post the property "No Solicitation". At that point it becomes a violation if that party comes on the property, but we cannot, as we have done in the past, keep a list of residents who have identified their properties as ones who do not want solicitors to come on the property. Under our current ordinance that is no longer enforceable, we had people register with the City, and when someone came in to solicit we gave them a copy of that list, and their permit was valid for a specific period of time and one of the grounds for canceling the permit was if they approached a property that was on the list and attempted to solicit that property. The ordinance also clears up some items related to the public right-of-way.

Mr. Forbes stated that covers it fairly well. This Supreme Court case has severely hampered what local governments are able to do. The Supreme Court has said rather than have a local government regulate this, the real power should be in the hands of the individual homeowner. Thatís why the court recommended that home owners be allowed to put up a "No Solicitation" sign. Homeowners have always been able to put up a "No Solicitation" sign and that would be enforceable, but this version of the ordinance will put some teeth behind that "No Solicitation" sign and make it a minor misdemeanor criminal offense. If someone chooses to ignore that sign, there will be more than just a turn around and go away.

Mayor Webster said I wonder what kind of control the local authority has over the size, shape and position of the "No Solicitation" signs. I would hate to see 3,200 of those pop up in our City in all different sizes, colors and shapes. Do we have any control over that?

Mr. Forbes replied you do. You already have control of signs through other means, but actually itís something that can be built into this ordinance as far as placement. Itís probably a good idea to have something in the ordinance to keep the language consistent for enforcement purposes and also placement. It is something that we have worked into the ordinance. It does help with aesthetics, but perhaps more importantly, it helps with the enforcement if all the signs are in a uniform place.

Mr. Osborn said we were not out in left field with our existing ordinance. Justice Remquist said this decision treads on sixty years of case law on this very topic.

Mr. Danbury said we all see people next to the freeway with signs that say "Will Work for Food." Will this person be able to go door-to-door and ask for money?

Mr. Forbes responded I would think somebody going door-to-door asking for money in return for services rendered would fall under the definition of commercial solicitation under the proposed ordinance. Commercial solicitors are required to register with the City. I believe we would have to see a 501c, some designation for not-for-profit.

Mr. Osborn stated we have retained the assurity bond that was in our previous ordinance. Any commercial solicitor who registers with the City to go door-to-door and who is not a resident of the City, or even a resident who is selling a product that is not made in Springdale, will have to post a $1,000 bond with us. We hold that bond for the protection of any resident who might somehow be disadvantaged by that party by fraud or failure to deliver the product. The things we are really concerned about are marginal businesses or scams like painting the driveway and saying itís an overlay.

Ms. Pollitt said I have a question on the Mayorís Court report for January Ė March. They sent nine cases to Hamilton County in February and that was a big jump from January. Is that just a coincidence?

Mayor Webster replied I really donít know; Iíll get you an answer.



Board of Zoning Appeals - May 20


Mr. Danbury made a motion that Council go into an executive session as a meeting of the whole to discuss possible pending litigation. Mr. Vanover seconded. The motion passed with seven affirmative votes.

Council went into executive session at 8:35 p.m. Council resumed at 8:55 p.m.


Ordinance 12-2003 - May 7

Ordinance 14-2003 - May 7

Ordinance 18-2003 - May 7


New solicitation code changes - May 7

Mr. Osborn said I apologize to Council and the Clerk. Item 5, the ordinance that Mr. Galster mentioned in his discussion, is not a Zoning Code ordinance. Itís an amendment to other chapters of the Springdale Code of Ordinances where we need to correct citations into the new Zoning Code. Itís also adding language that a contractor be fully up to current standards with the Springdale Tax Department and adds fence to the type of improvements that require a building permit. This does not require a public hearing.

Council adjourned at 9: 05 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,




Edward F. Knox

Clerk of Council/Finance Director

Minutes Approved:

Kathy McNear, President of Council



__________________________, 2003